RULES EDIT: please do not be mentioning or discussing names before they have been picked. It's fine to give a justification of your own pick, and to comment on players who have already been selected. No point giving away drafting strategy to you competitors!!!

BTW ... the first round always takes the longest. Until people are familiar with where they are picking etc, and the fact that they have to check in, it'll go slowly. But it will speed up when your teams start to take shape, and interest grows

There are always a couple who join, then sort of forget until reminded ... unfortuntley there is no PM or IM option in the forum.

Originally posted by JohnnyA 1. The draft will be randomised, and we will pick in turn. Check ou this Vintage Baseball Draft I'm involved with to see how the selection will work:Vintage Baseball Draft Thread

So this oprder remains the same throughout, or what.

Giving us numbers for Round 1 - ie 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 etc.

In Round 2 is it 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 etc. or what?

Originally posted by JohnnyA 2. There will be a 24 hour waiting period between picks. But try and check in much more regularly. We'll suspend the 24 limitation at the weekends. If you miss the 24 hour period, you will be skipped.

24 hours between when? may be a bit harsh to enforce, especially with the time differences across the world.

marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

Is anyone else putting together a short or long list? I'm trying to build a spreadsheet. In the end, I'll prob'ly just list the names in some sort of order ... and then watch as they're taken by others ... as is the way with these drafts.

There's a lot to figure into the equation:

1. Everyone has to pick someone from every test playing nation (apart from Zim and Bang).
2. No more than 4 from each country.
3. Positional scarcity (i.e. W/K for sure, openers maybe?)
4. The value of all-rounders verse specialists

Everyone should make up some sort of draft sheet, and fill in the names of the players everyone picks. Some sort of spreadsheet or grid/table should work.

Also, make sure you keep track of the positions you need to fill. Remember, there is a 10 game minimum for positional eligability.

Originally posted by marc71178 Erm, isn't this getting a bit too regimented - people may only pop on to answer one thread or other, and might miss the odd thing they should respond to.

Hi Marc,

24 hours is actually very very leisurely ... when we get up and running you'll realise that this is not regimented at all. The limit is also suspended at the weekend. Asking people to wait any longer is unreasonable.

I'm reminding people now to make sure they know we've started. I did say at the beginning that it's best to be able to check in quite regularly. The fact that people check in in different time zones should have no real bearing.

I just ask that people check the draft whenever they come to the site. That's not too much to ask.

At the start of the baseball season, when we do these drafts "for real", there's normally a 3 hour limit on picks during the day ... and that frustrates some people

So this order remains the same throughout, or what.

It snakes back and forth Marc. Last to pick in round 1, is first to pick in round 2 ... and so on for 13 rounds of drafting. There are different strategies depending on were you draft. If you're at the corners, you get two quick picks, then you have to wait a while. It's pretty easy to predict who will not be available next time around. If you're in the middle, then you have to consider who might be available next time around ... because it's easier to predict. Best position in my book is in-between middle and end.

Originally posted by JohnnyA 24 hours is actually very very leisurely ... when we get up and running you'll realise that this is not regimented at all. The limit is also suspended at the weekend. Asking people to wait any longer is unreasonable.

Originally posted by luckyeddie since the very nature of this thread is that it should be visited by a dozen members regularly, it should pretty well stay on the first page automatically so 'topping' it isn't necessary (besides, it's probably only of interest to those actually having a go).

We could well think of setting up a forum section for this type of activity, though, thus keeping it away from the regular cricket chat.

I agree with both points. There are probably too many Topped/Sticky threads as it is. It's confusing.

As for moving this to another forum section, could we hold off on that until after the first round of drafting. That way everyone will know.

Just a few things Im not 100% on ,
Will you gain extra points by picking batsman who can bowl a little (ie: do batsman's bowling stats & bowlers batting stats count) and if so are they weighted to reflect the fact these guys dont bowl much.

Originally posted by iamdavid Just a few things Im not 100% on ,
Will you gain extra points by picking batsman who can bowl a little (ie: do batsman's bowling stats & bowlers batting stats count) and if so are they weighted to reflect the fact these guys dont bowl much.

Also I assume we are picking current players right??

Current players ... yes ...

There WAS a clause at the end of the rules in the first post of this thread that dealt with this. I've no idea where it went. I'll update it again It stated that: If you select a player as a batter you can elect to discard his bowling stats as long as he has taken less than 100 wickets.

So for instance, if you want to pick Viv Richards, but don't like the fact that he took 60 wickets at an average of 61, then you can elect to discard is bowling stats. His 61 average could be harmful for your overall team bowling average. BUT you have to discard ALL his bowling stats. You can't keep his 60 wickets and discard his harmful Bowling Average.

But if you pick Ian Botham or Kapil Dev, then that's a different matter.

Hope that helps.

Jon

EDIT: I just added the 100 wicket limit (I forgot)

Please make your picks in the other thread ... this thread is for discussion and debate about the draft. Thanks, Jon.